Unfortunately for every clued in person that sees apps for what they are (a return to the past rather than a jump into the future) there are a hundred or more that have no idea about what is at stake here that will happily download your bullshit app.
No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
11–20 of 222 posts
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#12Why couldn't people (like the nice fellows of pulse) create something which allows these newspapers to publish article from web to a mobile app? One single app for all the newspapers. Pay to subscribe or generate ad revenue, anything. Its really frustrating to not be able to read news on the phone.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#13Most recent offender: Quora.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#14It's a strategy to dismantle the Web, which had the "disadvantage" of being simultaneously free and a level playing field, and replacing it with a loose network of fiefdoms, each a walled garden (a term often used to describe Apple in its entirety). Most of these apps are advertising delivery mechanisms masquerading as utilities. Another role they have is to prevent copying of content or links from one fiefdom to ano…
Sorry, but I see way way way less ads in apps than on the web. I'd say the web is stuck with the mindset that the only way to make money is by heavy advertising or selling you to the ads companies.
> Sorry, but I see way way way less ads in apps than on the web.
Yes, because these "walled-garden" apps are just being introduced, and they want to be on their best behavior for the moment. Sort of like a drug dealer, who gives the addict his first hit free.
Also, I think you meant to say "fewer ads", not "less ads":
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#15It's a strategy to dismantle the Web, which had the "disadvantage" of being simultaneously free and a level playing field, and replacing it with a loose network of fiefdoms, each a walled garden (a term often used to describe Apple in its entirety). Most of these apps are advertising delivery mechanisms masquerading as utilities. Another role they have is to prevent copying of content or links from one fiefdom to ano…
A lot of those tablet apps suck, because the priorities driving them aren't the readers . This means that they'll either lose in the long run, or adapt to serve reader's needs.
I see your point, but if this were true, then cell phone service (another walled garden of separate fiefdoms) would gradually get better instead of worse. But it's getting worse.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#16Unfortunately for every clued in person that sees apps for what they are (a return to the past rather than a jump into the future) there are a hundred or more that have no idea about what is at stake here that will happily download your bullshit app.
If you don't mind me asking, what exactly is at stake? It's not exactly a step into the future but it's not really a step back either, when you consider apps that access phone capabilities (notifications, for example). For me there's also this notion of apps being registered on my phone for specific actions (want to share a photo? Use the facebook app). There are also places where I don't have net access, so having offline apps can be useful.
In an ideal world almost all of this can be transformed into what I imagine FF OS is trying to accomplish... but until then I am not exactly thrilled about it, but apps are not the devil incarnate either. They're pretty much the status quo.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#17I absolutely agree with this, I recently removed a bunch of news apps from my phone because I found myself using the browser to read news websites even when I had their app already installed.
One of the few advantages of a news app is the occasional notification and even then most the time they are implemented in an annoying fashion. It'd be nice if there was a standard that allowed users to subscribe to push notifications directly from websites without having to install an app. In general it'd be nice to see phone OS's opening up their api's to websites and not only apps.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#18Turning "blobs of content" into apps is going to make a lot of money when the Apple TV comes out
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#19Unfortunately for every clued in person that sees apps for what they are (a return to the past rather than a jump into the future) there are a hundred or more that have no idea about what is at stake here that will happily download your bullshit app.
If you don't mind me asking, what exactly is at stake? It's not exactly a step into the future but it's not really a step back either, when you consider apps that access phone capabilities (notifications, for example). For me there's also this notion of apps being registered on my phone for specific actions (want to share a photo? Use the facebook app). There are also places where I don't have net access, so having o…
I dont think the point is that apps are evil; the point is that they are inconvenient and unnecessary way to deliver text and images, if that's all they're designed to do. Interacting with the phone and notification capabilities of the OS is a solid use case for a client app; reading news articles is just not.
Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, but I see way way way less ads in apps than on the web. I'd say the web is stuck with the mindset that the only way to make money is by heavy advertising or selling you to the ads companies.
> Sorry, but I see way way way less ads in apps than on the web. Yes, because these "walled-garden" apps are just being introduced, and they want to be on their best behavior for the moment. Sort of like a drug dealer, who gives the addict his first hit free. Also, I think you meant to say "fewer ads", not "less ads": http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/less-or-fewer
How about adds taking less space?